Larry E Miller1, Joseph S Gondusky2, Samir Bhattacharyya3, Atul F Kamath4, Friedrich Boettner5, John Wright3. 1. Miller Scientific Consulting, Inc, Asheville, North Carolina. 2. Jordan-Young Institute, Virginia Beach, Virginia. 3. DePuy Synthes, Raynham, Massachusetts. 4. Penn Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Leonard Davis Institute of Health Economics, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 5. Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The choice between anterior approach (AA) and posterior approach (PA) in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is controversial. Previous reviews have predominantly relied on data from retrospective studies. METHODS: This systematic review included prospective studies comparing postoperative outcomes through 90 days of AA vs PA in primary THA. Outcomes were pain severity, narcotic usage, hip function using Harris Hip Score, and complications. Random effects meta-analysis was performed for all outcomes. Efficacy data were reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) where values of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 1.0 were defined as small, medium, large, and very large effect sizes, respectively. Complications were reported as the absolute risk difference (RD) where a positive value implied higher risk with AA and a lower value implied lower risk with AA. RESULTS: A total of 13 prospective comparative studies (7 randomized) with patients treated with AA (n = 524) or PA (n = 520) were included. The AA was associated with lower pain severity (SMD = -0.37, P < .001), lower narcotic usage (SMD = -0.36, P = .002), and improved hip function (SMD = 0.31, P = .002) compared to PA. No differences between surgical approaches were observed for dislocation (RD = 0.2%, P = .87), fracture (RD = 0.2%, P = .87), hematoma (RD = 0%, P = .99), infection (RD = 0.2%, P = .85), thromboembolic event (RD = -0.9%, P = .42), or reoperation (RD = 1.3%, P = .26). Conclusions of this study were unchanged when subjected to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies comparing postoperative outcomes through 90 days of AA vs PA in primary THA, patients treated with AA reported less pain, consumed fewer narcotics, and reported better hip function. No statistical differences in complication rates were detected between AA and PA. Ultimately, the choice of surgical approach in primary THA should consider preference and experience of the surgeon as well as preference and anatomy of the patient.
BACKGROUND: The choice between anterior approach (AA) and posterior approach (PA) in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA) is controversial. Previous reviews have predominantly relied on data from retrospective studies. METHODS: This systematic review included prospective studies comparing postoperative outcomes through 90 days of AA vs PA in primary THA. Outcomes were pain severity, narcotic usage, hip function using Harris Hip Score, and complications. Random effects meta-analysis was performed for all outcomes. Efficacy data were reported as standardized mean difference (SMD) where values of 0.2, 0.5, 0.8, and 1.0 were defined as small, medium, large, and very large effect sizes, respectively. Complications were reported as the absolute risk difference (RD) where a positive value implied higher risk with AA and a lower value implied lower risk with AA. RESULTS: A total of 13 prospective comparative studies (7 randomized) with patients treated with AA (n = 524) or PA (n = 520) were included. The AA was associated with lower pain severity (SMD = -0.37, P < .001), lower narcotic usage (SMD = -0.36, P = .002), and improved hip function (SMD = 0.31, P = .002) compared to PA. No differences between surgical approaches were observed for dislocation (RD = 0.2%, P = .87), fracture (RD = 0.2%, P = .87), hematoma (RD = 0%, P = .99), infection (RD = 0.2%, P = .85), thromboembolic event (RD = -0.9%, P = .42), or reoperation (RD = 1.3%, P = .26). Conclusions of this study were unchanged when subjected to sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies comparing postoperative outcomes through 90 days of AA vs PA in primary THA, patients treated with AA reported less pain, consumed fewer narcotics, and reported better hip function. No statistical differences in complication rates were detected between AA and PA. Ultimately, the choice of surgical approach in primary THA should consider preference and experience of the surgeon as well as preference and anatomy of the patient.
Authors: Romain Galmiche; Stéphane Poitras; Johanna Dobransky; Paul R Kim; Robert J Feibel; Wade Gofton; Hesham Abdelbary; Paul E Beaulé Journal: Can J Surg Date: 2020-04-17 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Drake G LeBrun; Scott M LaValva; Bradford S Waddell; David J Mayman; Seth A Jerabek; Michael M Alexiades; Michael P Ast Journal: HSS J Date: 2021-11-08
Authors: Kevin Berardino; Austin H Carroll; Daniel Popovsky; Robert Ricotti; Matthew D Civilette; William F Sherman; Alan D Kaye Journal: Orthop Rev (Pavia) Date: 2022-05-31
Authors: Barbara Resnick; J Richard Hebel; Ann L Gruber-Baldini; Gregory E Hicks; Marc C Hochberg; Denise Orwig; Marty Eastlack; Jay Magaziner Journal: Arch Gerontol Geriatr Date: 2018-02-15 Impact factor: 3.250